The whole idea is that someone is taking advantage of special knowledge to take unfair advantage.
Like say, someone gets wind that a government report will be released in two days time criticising a company. Someone hearing that information sells off all his shares the day before the report is released.
Recovers cash. Had he or she waited two days, the stock price fell to have what it was.
Or....
Someone knows about a sale of a company days before it is announced publicly and suddenly buys up a raft of shares at a low price, knowing the sale price is higher.
In the case of FPI, the sale of the company was known publicly and, it appears all the stock transactions were properly recorded and done in the open.
By definition, it doesn't look like insider trading.
From the sound of David Cochrane's debrief on CBC Radio, this is just another scurrilous attempt by the current minister of fisheries to interfere in the operation of fishing companies.Rideout seems to be vying for the designation: Hugo Chavez of the Newfoundland and Labrador fishing industry.
All Tom Rideout seem to be accomplishing, though, is demonstrating that his knowledge of securities law is on par with his own assessment of his business knowledge.
Res ipsa loquitor, Tommy.
-srbp-
Update: Psst Tom. There's always a blackout on insider trading. Rideout's quote to CBC makes it sound like the blackout was a special thing for just this circumstance.
Funny thing is even people who aren't lawyers know that when you send threatening letters to FPI management while the company is sorting through sales offers, that's unwarranted interference in a private sector company.
Even if it isn't illegal, it is highly improper.
Like shutting down a portion of a company's fish processing operation, a portion government knew was subsidizing the rest of the company's processing activities.
Would that ramp up the pressure on the company to sell off its assets?
Funny thing is even people who aren't lawyers know that when you send threatening letters to FPI management while the company is sorting through sales offers, that's unwarranted interference in a private sector company.
Even if it isn't illegal, it is highly improper.
Like shutting down a portion of a company's fish processing operation, a portion government knew was subsidizing the rest of the company's processing activities.
Would that ramp up the pressure on the company to sell off its assets?